Case Digest (B.M. No. 2540) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
In In re: Petition to Sign in the Roll of Attorneys, petitioner Michael A. Medado graduated from the University of the Philippines with a Bachelor of Laws in 1979 and obtained an 82.7% weighted average in the 1979 Bar Examinations. After taking the Attorney’s Oath on May 7, 1980, at the Philippine International Convention Center, he was scheduled to sign the Roll of Attorneys on May 13, 1980, but failed to appear due to a misplaced Notice to Sign. Unaware that the entrance record he signed at PICC was not the Roll itself, he practiced corporate and taxation law for over three decades under the honest but mistaken belief that the oath-taking sufficed. In 2005, his inability to provide a roll number for MCLE compliance exposed the lapse. On February 6, 2012, he filed a petition with the Supreme Court to allow him to sign the Roll. The Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) conducted a clarificatory conference on September 21, 2012, and recommended denial on grounds of gross negligence Case Digest (B.M. No. 2540) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Background of the Petition
- Michael A. Medado (petitioner) graduated from the University of the Philippines with an LL.B. in 1979 and passed the bar the same year with an 82.7% general weighted average.
- He took the Attorney’s Oath on May 7, 1980 at the PICC and was scheduled to sign in the Roll of Attorneys on May 13, 1980.
- Failure to Sign and Subsequent Practice
- Petitioner misplaced the “Notice to Sign the Roll of Attorneys” during a provincial vacation and did not sign on the scheduled date.
- Several years later, upon discovering the notice in his files, he realized his omission but continued in corporate and taxation practice under the mistaken belief that the oath alone sufficed.
- Discovery and Filing of Petition
- In 2005, petitioner could not provide a roll number for MCLE compliance, confirming he had never been enrolled.
- On February 6, 2012, Medado filed a Petition to Sign in the Roll of Attorneys. The Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) held a clarificatory conference on September 21, 2012 and, on February 4, 2013, recommended denial due to gross negligence and lack of merit.
- Supreme Court Resolution
- The Court reviewed the record and granted the petition, subject to (a) a one-year deferred signing period, (b) a P32,000 fine for unauthorized practice, and (c) suspension-like conditions during the deferment.
- The Court found petitioner acted in good faith, demonstrated moral character, but engaged in unauthorized practice and violated Canon 9 of the Code of Professional Responsibility.
Issues:
- Whether petitioner’s failure for over 30 years to sign in the Roll of Attorneys warrants denial of his petition or punishment short of disbarment.
- Whether Medado’s conduct constitutes unauthorized practice of law and breach of Canon 9, and what disciplinary measures are appropriate.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)